What Would Stratospheric Spraying (Geoengineering) Look Like?

There have been a lot of posts on ATS of late from folk claiming that scenes like this:

or this:

or even this:

are evidence of stratospheric geoengineering, rather than just common or garden commercial aircraft contrails.

However, it's quite clear that they occur well within the troposphere - not the stratosphere - the same region of the atmosphere in which nearly all
other clouds occur . Whatever they are, they are emphatically NOT in the stratosphere nor evidence of geoengineering.

(commercial aircraft do often fly in the very lowest reaches of the stratosphere - however contrails typically form when they are moving through the
troposphere - which is why we can often see the aircraft themselves with the naked eye)

But that does not mean that, as some allege, that proposed projects for stratospheric geoengineering - usually suggested as a means of preventing
global warming - are not occurring.

The idea for stratospheric geoengineering originated when it was discovered that large volcanic eruptions eject huge amounts of aerosols - notably
sulphates - into the stratosphere and that these have a the effect of cuasing global cooling. After the Pinatubo eruption in 1991 there was a
noticeable drop in global temperatures. If we could replicate the
effects of such an eruption, then we might counter the effects of, what is in effect another form of geoengineering - anthropogenic global warming.
That's the theory.

It's worth noting that most volcanic eruptions do not eject material into the stratosphere - indeed, that was the problem a year ago when Eyja
erupted in Iceland: the eruption threw ash only around 20,000ft up into the atmosphere, well below the stratosphere, and this meant that aircraft
flying to/from Europe had to fly through the ash cloud when taking off/landing. As this presented a danger to aircraft, flights were cancelled. As
I'm sure we all recall. Had it been a more masisve eruption and the ash had been sent into the stratosphere - well above the level at which aircraft
normally fly - there would not have been a problem!

Now, given that any such stratospheric geoengineering operation would involve aircraft flying much higher than normal, and spraying into a region of
the atmosphere where clouds do not normally form, is there any way we could see it happening? Well maybe there is.

There are in fact clouds which do form in the stratosphere (note: some very big cumulonumbus clouds may also extend upwards into the stratosphere) and
these are commonly referred to as nocties. Nocties, or noctilucent clouds, are usually seen at high to mid latitudes in mid summer. June and July
are the best months in the northern hemisphere. They form in the stratosphere and only become visible because they reflect sunlight when the sun is
below the horizon. They are best seen an hour or two after sunset or before sunrise. And they look like this:

Interestingly, there has been a big increase in sightings of nocties in recent years. Some attribute this to low solar activity. It has also been
suggested that exhaust from the space shuttle may be aiding their
formation.

It is also occasionally possible to see other evidence of stratospheric clouds - specifically those (as mentioned above) caused by massive volcanic
eruptions. Such clouds may more readily manifest themselves in the form of vibrant sunsets -
these pictures were taken after the Sarychev eruption in 2009. But
such ash clouds can also be visible - just - to the naked eye. Hopefully you can make them out in these photos I took around the same time:

Note: these pictures have been enhanced to adjust the contrast and make the clouds more obvious. This is the sort of view seen at sunset at the
time:

but the stratospheric clouds are not that obvious! You can see them better in this enhanced version:

they can been seen in this picture as ghostly, blue-white wisps - not dissimilar in fact to nocties!

Like noctilucent clouds, these volcanic clouds are also not visible during the daytime - but they can been seen closer to sunset/sunrise than
nocties.

So, that's stratospheric clouds for you. Not easy to see! But if spraying in the stratosphere is taking place, that's the sort of thing we should
be looking out for.

Note: one of my hobbies is photographing meteorlogical phenomena. I have also been issuing weather forecasts on the internet since 2004, have a
number of friends who are professional meteorologists, and have a job which provides me plenty of time for surfing the internet through the day, and
finding interesting stories, articles and scientific papers - some of which I then post up for reference on my blog (see link below). None of which
should, however, have any real relevance - but I thnk it's useful before you ask any questions to have some idea of my background.

So Essan.... it seems as if you are saying that "stratospheric aerosol geo-engineering doesn't take place because clouds and and other such stuff
forms in the troposphere?

I think they use that term because the planes do indeed fly in a combination of the upper troposphere and the lower stratosphere. In fact: The
NASA satellite that failed a couple months back was sent up to specifically study the effects of aerosols left by planes in that portion of the
atmosphere (which includes lower stratosphere). These aerosols they would study would include natural aerosols as well as man made ones that are
done on purpose for research and ones that are benign.
So, in other words...imo..... they use the term "stratospheric aerosol geo-engineering" not because they fly to the top of the stratosphere but
merely because part of it takes place in the stratosphere as well as the troposphere.

However, it's quite clear that they occur well within the troposphere - not the stratosphere - the same region of the atmosphere in which nearly all
other clouds occur . Whatever they are, they are emphatically NOT in the stratosphere nor evidence of geoengineering.

I am comprehending just fine. I may have not been clear in what I said.... sheesh ...my bad.

Seems to me he is saying whatever they are spraying is not in the stratosphere therefore it is not stratospheric geo-engineering.

However, it's quite clear that they occur well within the troposphere - not the stratosphere - the same region of the atmosphere in which nearly all
other clouds occur . Whatever they are, they are emphatically NOT in the stratosphere nor evidence of geoengineering.

I am comprehending just fine. I may have not been clear in what I said.... sheesh ...my bad.

Seems to me he is saying whatever they are spraying is not in the stratosphere therefore it is not stratospheric geo-engineering.

The OP neither said that spraying was occurring in the tropsphere nor opined "IF" they sprayed at all.

What he clearly said was that people who see contrails and use them as "evidence" of "stratospheric geoengineering" are mistaken:

T here have been a lot of posts on ATS of late from folk claiming that scenes like this:
(pic of contrails]
or this:
(more contrail pics]
or even this:
(see above)
are evidence of stratospheric geoengineering, rather than just common or garden commercial aircraft contrails.

However, it's quite clear that they occur well within the troposphere - not the stratosphere - the same region of the atmosphere in which nearly all
other clouds occur . Whatever they are, they are emphatically NOT in the stratosphere nor evidence of geoengineering.
...
But that does not mean that, as some allege, that proposed projects for stratospheric geoengineering - usually suggested as a means of preventing
global warming - are not occurring.

That's really very clear. Absolutely no need for embellishment or misrepresentation.

He said that tropospheric contrails are not in the stratosphere - the pictures that people are posting are contrails/chemtrails, and are not in the
stratosphere - if you think there's STRATOSPHERIC spraying going on, why are you posting pictures from the TROPOSPHERE?

Hmmm well I am no expert but I believe airplanes usually fly around the lower stratosphere. And for contrails to form it needs to be cold and humid.
That would be the stratosphere. I don't doubt they can form in the troposphere as well but thats not the point. Point is, contrails/chemtrails can
be in the stratosphere and are since that's the cruising altitude of most jets.

now by all means argue that he is wrong that the trails are in the stratosphere........

but I think you'll find few a/c actually cruise in the stratosphere - wiki says the stratosphere starts at 10km (about 33,000 feet), but also that the
tropopause - the area of thermodynamic equilibrium between the troposphere and stratosphere is between 11-17km (poles & equator), UK weather online
says 11-20km, NASA says it goes to 15km withotu giving locations - I would expect that to be an average over the USA - and Boeing says its 747
Stratospheric observatory will cruise at 41,000 feet - 12km.

Some business jets will cruise at 39,000+ feet - the later Gulfstreams made a point of advertising a 41,000 ft cruise altitude for high speed and long
range, and of couorse plenty of military combat a/c get that high and higher.

New civilian airliners can certainly get above 40,000 feet - IIRC the listed "service ceiling" for 777's is about 43,000 feet - but that's when they
are empty - add in a full fuel load, passengers, food, water, baggage, freight and luggage and they won't get anywhere enar that - which is why they
"step up" as they burn fuel on long legs such as Atlantic or Pacific crossings.

there's a discussion about cruise heights on Airliners.net at www.airliners.net... - which includes
discussion about how to find track heights on flightaware.com.

you'll see there that most cruising is done in the mid-30,000's (say 33-38,000 ft), with ocasional excursions as high as 41,000, and sometimes
restrictions to as little as 29,000.

Edited to add: Oh and the higher heights are only achieved on longer trips when fuel gets burned off - especually routes such as trans-pacific, or
LA-Europe. shorter flights simply dont' get that high for sevral reasons - some ar so short as to not have time to climb & descent to great heights
(anything less than about 350 miles will ahve that problem - sometimes longer), and also more congested airspace and crossing routes limiting the
freedom to climb.

Originally posted by dplum517
The NASA satellite that failed a couple months back was sent up to specifically study the effects of aerosols left by planes in that portion of the
atmosphere (which includes lower stratosphere).

No, it was sent up to study aerosols per se in all parts of the atmosphere

Whilst some do come from aircraft exhaust, much more come from car exhausts, for example. And the majority are natural.

But that's not the point. The point is that we can't see these aerosols except when they are in the very lower reaches of the troposphere where
they form 'pollution haze' (or, more naturally, pollen haze or dust storms). Unless you look very carefully - and know what to look for as well -
it's extremely difficult and very unusual to see anything in the stratosphere. And it's in the stratosphere where spraying of aerosols has been
proposed as a means of reducing global warming.

I did have another thought on this issue, as I was laying in bed this morning ...... we know that rocket and space shuttle launches normally result
in big contrails being produced. Does anyone have any footage or photos of these as they cimb up through the tropopause and into the stratosphere
and beyond? My guess is that as they do so the contrail becomes much weaker or disappears alltogether. Partly because the air is more rarified
(less water vapour) and partly because it becomes warmer.

btw I was hoping this thread would develop into a useful discussion, with points and questions raised, as they help me focus my thoughts better - and
remind me of all the many important things I forgot to mention in my brief OP!

One thing I forgot is that there is type of cloud that does form in the stratosphere though I've never seen them - they're normaly only found
in polar regions where the upper air is extremely cold (the tropopause is typically -55c to -60c and because relative humidity at this altitude is
close to zero, it needs to be even colder for clouds - and contrails - to form). These clouds are called nacreous or polar stratospheric clouds.

There's a good description of the conditions of the tropopause and lower stratosphere - and an excellent photo - here:

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.